Kevin Yin's Blog #5

 To be honest, it has been a long time for me – a Chinese social media and news reader, not hearing any information about the follow-up of the Ukraine and Russia crisis on Chinese websites. Yes, you can’t find a lot of information about the invasion on Chinese news websites. If you do, then the news may be connected with the following reaction of European countries towards Russia, like the sanctions and changes in foreign policies. Some of the news writers did actually defame some of Ukrainian Defiance for some bad activities. It is quite clear for other people to understand the attitude of China towards the crisis. How about other Asian countries?

Although I don’t want to be mean at this point, I have to indicate that the attitudes of many “second-tier power” countries are not that genuine. If we rationally consider the situation and the nature of politics, we must admit that it is not clever to think in either only a humanitarian angle or only a political angle. We need to combine them together. For instance, Japan’s reaction towards Russia was pretty remarkable – well, undoubtedly remarkable on the moral side. “Japan has been in lockstep with the G-7 in imposing punishing sanctions, for example, freezing assets of Russian banks, removing those banks from the SWIFT messaging system, restricting central bank transactions, freezing the assets of Putin and his close associates, imposing export controls to limit the access to advanced technology.” (Reference 1) We all know that it is not appropriate to invade another country no matter in which cases in contemporary society, so Russia is supposed to be criticized and opposed by many countries. However, if we also add some political minds, the attitudes of those countries are quite vital to divide the world into two great parts: China, Russia, and some other smaller countries; America, European union, and some other smaller countries. I know it is not standardized to simply categorize the groups, but it is what it is. As the author in the article says: “we seem to be dangerously closer to a divided world where we have China and Russia on one half and the Western or the democratic side on the other half.” (Reference 1)

The attitudes of different countries are important, but the impact and consequences of those “attitudes” are also important in this current world. It is more like to pick a side, rather than simply state the attitudes. Regrettably, the world can’t work just in a humanitarian way, and more and more wars are going to come for this dissociated era.

Source:

https://www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/how-asian-countries-are-reacting-to-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine/

Comments

  1. Brooke WallaceMay 5, 2022 at 11:12 AM

    Kevin,
    Great read! You have a great take on Southeast Asia's muted response to the Russian invasion and why that might be. I have read that Thailand and Malaysia have remained silent, whereas other countries such as Singapore and Indonesia (Philippines staying neutral) have imposed harsh sanctions or condemned Putin's barbaric actions. I also learned that nine of the 11 Southeast Asian states voted for a UN resolution reprimanding Russia for its actions and calling for a ceasefire. Interestingly enough, Vietnam and Laos, two historic allies of Russia, abstained from voting. I have not given much thought to the response of the rest of the world like Southeast Asia. I find it interesting that a lot of leaders have chosen not to take a side in the Russia Ukraine conflict because Russia is seen as a major trading partner (the region's biggest arms supplier). I like that you mentioned the two different angles (political/military v. humanitarian) and how one should not concentrate on taking one but rather combining the two. This is where the attitudes are causing more of a divide - I definitely agree with you that more wars are to come if we shy away from stating our attitudes and pick sides.

    ReplyDelete
  2. CiaraMay 10, 2022 at 12:31 PM

    Kevin,
    This post is very interesting as I was mostly unaware of the silent response of many countries in Asia. I looked this up and found that Singapore was the only southeast Asian country to respond to the invasions while the rest have remained silent. Thailand, Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Timor-Leste all have not shown support for Ukraine or bad things about Russia. These countries remaining silence do not show support for a country, Ukraine, who is in much need of it. Your point about the effects of the attitudes these countries show is very important not just in this situation, but all similar to it. Supporting Ukraine is crucial but saying nothing is just as bad as being against them. This shows Russia that these countries in South Asia are not willing to defend or speak up.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Currency Manipulation of the 21st Century: China and the US

                           Currency Manipulation of the 21st Century: China and the US Now more than ever, countries feel tempted to engage in a ‘currency war’ and go back and forth trying to devalue their currency in efforts to encourage exports. The two largest economies, China and the United States, seem to be in a long, bitter trade dispute as the trade relationship is significantly imbalanced. From tariffs to currency, trade tensions are clearly escalating with both sides slapping substantial tariffs on each other’s goods. Currency manipulation (arguably the world’s most protectionist international economic policy) refers to the concept of countries artificially lowering the value of their currency to achieve an unfair competitive advantage (Forbes). The U.S. Dollar is the most popular reserve, and everyone wants a stake in our economy. Unlike many other countries, China does not ha...
Read more

Ciara: blog post #5

  The fear of an action might be powerful enough to scare off another party, or cause them to fear the lengths others are willing to go. As Kenneth Waltz argues in “Why Iran Should Get the Bomb: Nuclear Balancing Would Mean Stability” allowing more countries to obtain nuclear defense would put international relations at a general deterrence from the nuclear wars that could start. Deterrence is a strategy that can be used in order to prevent another party from undertaking an action through coercion. Many times this works as a method to keep two parties from destroying each other, or to allow a smaller army to scare off a larger one to show the lengths they would go. Nuclear deterrence can be the ultimate way of scaring off other parties as it is the strongest weapon that could potentially cause complete destruction. Even if a nuclear power is relatively small and compared to other nuclear powers would seem less threatening, once they cross the threshold they are using deterrence (Wa...
Read more